Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

I have a motion from Commissioner Boulo and a second from Commissioner Butler to accept the meeting action minutes as presented. All those in favor of approval I. Any opposed? Hearing none. That passes unanimously. Do we have any general public comment? No, we do not. Okay. Um, we have no preliminary plats tonight to consider and we do not have any resonings or use permits tonight to consider. However, we do have one text amendment to consider.

Ma'am, are you here for public comment? Are we good? Okay. The text amendment on tonight's agenda is for RZ2604 text amendment to section 8.2 2 use tables section 8.5 section 6.3 table section 6.3.1B rural Milton overlay use table and section 9.1.2B festival parking of the unified development code to prohibit the use of festivals events outdoor indoor. I would like to call up Robin McDonald, our zoning manager, to present the staff report for RZ2604.

Thank you. Uh good evening, commissioners. Uh tonight, we're here to present to you a text amendment as uh the chairwoman uh announced and the purpose of it is pretty straightforward. is to remove festivals or events outdoor indoor as permitted or allowable use prospectively within the UDC. So, um just as a little bit of a historic um information, this use permit was utilized, I can't believe it's been almost 20 years since we've become a city, but prior to that in Fulton County um for what is known as the Renaissance Festival. Um typically it was done in South Fulton. So um obviously we don't have something like that um here and um let me just step through what is being proposed. Uh the use is being deleted from all the applicable zoning districts. I'll go through those different tables in a second. It's also being uh deleted within the rural Milton overlay use table uh as well as the required parking table. Um lastly, the requirements of non-conforming use status, expiration of approvals not acted upon, and maintenance and modifications to operating facilities. So, I'll walk through that. That's a lot. Uh that's a mouthful, but um we'll step through it. Um here are the tables. These are the use tables. And you can see at the bottom um that's highlighted the festivals events indooroutdoor um is being deleted as a use permitted. We still are keeping the actual uh definition and um the reference to it. So if somebody comes to us we can say hey we don't allow that uh kind of

similar that we have for bars or or massage uh places. So these are the use tables for the formbbased codes. The previous one was the nonformbased codes, the more traditional zoning district. Um here we have the crab apple in the upper left and the deerfield in the lower right. So again, we're just doing the same thing. Uh deleting it as a permitted use. Uh this is a table that comes out of the rural Milton overlay district area or regulations and you can see under the commercial type uses that's what it is kind of categorized as and we are deleting that uh from that um table. Uh lastly for the tables we have the vehicle parking requirements uh we're also deleting and again these are just snippets from the tables or not the tables in its entirety but didn't seem necessary to show the entire table. So here we have this is the section of the UDC uh article 8 that we talk about uses and each use has a definition as you can see under a defined as well as you can see on the bottom there's use standards and the red is what's been added u by our city attorney. Um, and just in summary on to the right, proposed changes uh to this section are prohibited use in all zoning districts. We've talked about that. And no new applications as of May 18th, which is um at the time that the city council will hear this item. Any existing approval as of May 18th may continue as a lawful non-conforming use. Any existing

approval that has not started operation on or before May 18th is subject to termination by council. Maintenance is permitted if it is consistent with the approved plan. So um if there's need to um make some uh you know do doing maintenance to a building that kind of thing you're allowed to do that. Modifications may be permitted with council approval if the existing use utilizes the same acreage and operational intensity. Um so that's basically in a nutshell what the left hand red uh indicates um or states in summary. So um that is there. So, just looking at the benefits of this text amendment, no longer allowing a square peg and a round hole, I like to say, uh, requests for certain types of festivals or events. Um, and then the rural event facility use permit allows similar type uses such as an event space, wedding venue, etc. within the AG1 zoning district. And then the use permit, assembly hall, event facility. I know these are very similar in the the naming, but this use permit allows similar type uses um within the formbbased codes. Um there was a CZIM meeting on March 24th and there were no one no one in attendance to that meeting. Um and with that, I'd be happy to answer any questions you might have. So one question in reading the maintenance and modification section it talks about if one if an existing facility that's in use wanted to make changes then then that's why it's important to keep keep the use standard. So if they

wanted to make modifications, we understand the whether that modification would have to be a variance or not because of the standards. um as well as there is I would think then if we're going to keep the use standards and what is now labeled as F we would also keep keep the standards for parking because if so that there would be guidance if an existing facility wanted to make a change in that condition. I would think if you're going to keep the U standards you would keep the parking standards to be consistent. Yeah, I think that's a reasonable um approach to it to be if all the standards would remain. So if they if the planning commission wanted to recommend approval uh but leaving the parking standards in table 9.1.2B um in I think that would be appropriate.

Yeah, I would think either they're all the standards are in or all the standards are out but not half of them. Yeah, it's it's a reference tool and if you I I agree the consistency of keeping the standards makes makes sense. And the only times those standards would apply is if existing uses wanted to request a change

or if if modifications if if we need to regulate them if if they exceeded these standards then then they may become applicable as well. So, are there currently existing um uses or you know out there that or applications that have been approved that are still out there?

So, we have one that is in operation which is Matilda's and then we have a second one um that was done probably 12 13 years ago that never began operation. Okay. And then my other one couple comments that I have on these red lines. one is the the noncon uh C C1 about the it be being considered a lawful nonconforming use uh you know I understand sometimes when you have non-conforming uses but then at some point if they want to make a change or do something which they were grandfathered in but now based on whatever potential changes is now it's going outside of the nonconforming lawful use, you know, where and and the reason why I'm bringing this up as a comment because, you know, you go on to say subject to continued compliance, etc., etc., use standards, but then again if it's non-conforming and at a certain point uh they lose their grandfathered eligibility for that use because of XYZ change which may still be a legal compliant thing, you know, with the laws, but it takes it outside of that uh approved non-conforming use. So, I don't know if that's something that we need to consider. I'm not sure I followed what your your scenario and question was. What I will say is uh there's two different concepts. One is a vested right and one is a legal non-conforming use or grandfathered. Those two terms mean the same thing. for vested rights. If they um get a use and change their position, which means to essentially to spend

money to develop according to those standards, they're vested and allowed to continue that use. Um as a matter of constitutional right, um that's fine. The legal non-conforming use standard, what that says is it was a perfectly valid legal use when they started it and now we've changed the rules. In this case, we've changed the rule to say it's not a valid use. The legal non-conforming use or grandfathering uh provision provides that you can continue to use that, but you can't change what you're doing to make it the the code refers to it in other sections. Um limits, you know, you can't expand, you can't um increase the intensity of the use, various things like you can keep doing what you're doing. We're not going to take it away from you,

but you can't expand. and if you cease doing it then you you may lose that grandfathering status. This does have a provision which allows them to come back to the council and the city and ask for permission to make modifications to their uses um pursuant to this statute. Uh but otherwise they wouldn't be able to make those changes.

Yeah. So, I guess the and the reason why I was asking about the non-conforming use because it just says in C1, you know, subject to continued compliance and the use standards set forth in this section. So, I just didn't know if by using the words use standards, if those are the standards, but even if you're allowed to potentially expand, but that's still considered allowable use standard, then is that going to be okay? because it's a non-conforming grandfather use that now all of a sudden if you go and change something, you know, you're potentially going to lose that grandfather status.

Um I I I believe that that this will those rights a vested right will apply regardless of what they say. If if they vested the right, what we say here won't change that right. We're not taking it away. Um they will have that vested right regardless of what we do here. Yeah. Yeah. No, if it's a grandfathered use, then we're expecting them to comply with whatever they're grandfathered in.

But then if they get sub subsequent approval for any changes, then that would supersede the provision which which uh talks about compliance. So, so the compliance would incorporate the modifications that would be allowed or a variance if if a separate variance for the use standards was allowed. Okay. So, I mean, in your opinion, you're comfortable with the way it's written for C1 where it just says and you know, and regulations and the use standards set forth. That's all I just want to make sure if it's non-conforming and then all of a sudden they change something, you know, yes, it may be complying with use standards, but

it's, you know, potentially outside of the grandfathering. Yeah. We just we just don't want the you the one use that's in operation. We don't

the intention is not for them to expand in intensity or let's just say, you know, the size of a building that's on there like it's Matilda. Let's say if Matilda said, "Well, we want to change the location of where they have, you know, the bands at the band stand and they they put it on the totally different side of the property." That's okay. We they just probably have to come in for a a site plan modification because it's not expanding the use. They're just moving that structure that was on the original site plan that was approved by council to a different location. I think regard regardless of what happens if they're going to change they're going to be back before the city and council for for approval. So I I don't have a problem with this requirement.

The other comment I had was uh for B2 do we need to say any application submitted after is you know ineligible even I mean because we already have in B1 that effective that date you know this use is no longer uh allowed. I I mean I I can agree with you that we would certainly take the position that that is the the effect it's making it perfectly clear. I mean yes. Yeah. Kind of is in my opinion it just seems redundant like okay we've already got that this use is no longer allowed in

B1 refers to the application as opposed to the use. So, it's it's slightly different in that B2 refers to we won't um anything. We won't accept the applications either. I I understand your point. Could you even make an application for something that you don't have a use for? We don't have a use for. That's what I'm saying. I mean um

Paul following up on his question about um uh and the use standards set forth in this section, the one operating use permit has received variances on those use standards. So would it be more accurate to say the use standards set forth in those section or previously approved variances? I I because they have a variance on the fencing uh number four and number five. So they have variances on two four and five.

I I don't have a problem with referring to that. So it's it's not like oh we're saying oh you have to come back into compliance with these if you already have a variance. I I I believe that would be the legitimate intent of the city as I understand it. Yeah. So adding or previously approved variances in which one? E2 C1 at the end where it says the standard set forth in this section or previously approved variances thereon and do we need to extend that to the parking or do they meet the parking?

They had shared parking. So I to be honest I probably but I don't know for sure. I mean I think that there they got approved for that additional parking in the back. So I think they're okay. So back to B2. Do you do you think we still need that or can you have an application for something that's no no longer an eligible use? Well, thank you, S. Just makes it clear.

I don't believe it would absolutely be necessary and that the prohibition would allow the staff to refuse to accept um applications for them. Okay. Yeah. Because I don't know if we have some like language like that for anything else that's no longer allowable, you know, as an as a use. So that's why I was like I think this is just redundant. I know we do for the B1. Yeah. B1. Yes. Right. B1. Yeah. No. No. What I was saying is then you wouldn't need B2 necessarily because you already have it as a prohibited use.

Any other questions for staff? I had a couple. So um going through it looking at table 8.2.2 two, which is the use table for crab apple form based code. If we're striking the category of all festivals or events outdoor and indoor,

does that in any way impact I mean the first thing that comes to mind is crab apple festival which is a enormous f probably the biggest event we have. So that's a that's a city sponsored and we have another section in the parks and recreation code for special events that are like oneoffs. So this is like permanent versus we have another like I said in parks and wreck there's a special event permit which is very confusing like even you could apply for it at your location if you exceed certain standards. So yes, it's taken care of. So that this would not this would not in any way negatively impact either crab apple festival or anything that goes on on the green

is what also what comes to mind correct like the um St. Patrick's some of the larger events. You know, I know once you get to a certain level, they've got to have sanitary plan, security plan, parking plan, all that. But none of what we're doing here would impact no any of that stuff. Okay. Right. And didn't um And maybe it was considered, but like for the green, I thought there was some Did that ever get put into effect where they could do like one event a month that they sponsored as opposed to having other people do one? There is agreement, but I'm not I can't quote you exactly outline, but yes, it's all taken care of.

Is is there a difference whether I'm assuming there's a difference between a city sponsored event and a privately sponsored event? There is. Yes. But is anything in here going to impact if someone wanted to have the equivalent of a private version of Call It Crab Apple Festival where they're blocking the road and is there anything in this that would impact that process application? No, they would go under the chapter 34 which is parks and wreck for the special event permit. Okay. And so there's certain regulations for that. First of all, they have to exceed certain uh like thresholds

certain par Yeah. Threshold. So if they exceed that those thresholds then they have to apply for the special events. So like the St. Patrick's, you know, events. Sure. They have to apply for this this chapter 34 special events. Okay. And it's a temporary event versus this is something that is permanent long-term kind of thing. So kind of apples and oranges.

The only other question I had, so going back to the the conversation about Matildas, we said if you know if they want to move say where the band performs, not an issue. they'll have to come in, get a approved, revised site plan, whatever that process typically is, if they wanted to expand.

So, let me hold you on that. Yeah. I mean, in my experience, we're very conservative on modifications of site plans. So, if they did want to move it, I would recommend that they apply for a site plan modification or zoning modification and it goes to city council to get their blessing. So, we do not as a staff like to unilaterally allow things changes just um because we want to make things as out in the public as possible. So, yeah. But if so, if we but if we strike that category, does that in any way preclude their ability to expand their offerings or is it they're going to have to come back and basically it'll be treated as a brand new application? Are we are we what I'm concerned about are we putting them in a box where they can't expand their offerings?

No, that that E2 uh section provides specifically provides for modification. Yeah. Okay. I just wanted to make sure I was clear on that. Yep. Mhm. Okay. Any other questions?

Um we the I will open the public hearing. Um but it does not look like we have anyone that has applied for the public hearing. Okay. So there are no members of the public wanting to speak on this item. Um, so I will conclude public comment. I like it when I get to flip pages. Um, any further questions for staff or Paul? No.

Okay. I will close the public hearing. Can I get a motion regarding RZ26-4? Otherwise, I'm willing to take a stab at it. Um, I make a motion that we me recommend approval of RZ 2604 text amendment to section 8.2 two use tables section 8.5 section 6.3 table section 6.3.1B rural mental overlay use table but not strike the reference to parking in section 9.1.2B 2B and also to add under section 8.5B striking B2 and under 8.5 C proposed language one to add at the end of that sentence or previously approved variances thereon. So just quick summary, make sure we all caught that. We want to keep the parking requirement in table 9.1.2.b vehicle parking requirements. So we want to keep that and not strike it. strike B2 entirely and then add the additional language on the tail end of

C1. C1. That's a that's a summary. Yep. And then and then accept the other proposed changes. Okay. I'll second that. Okay. We have a motion from Commissioner Birds with a second from Commissioner Edwards. Any discussion? Are you ready to vote? Um all those in favor of recommending vote I.

Any opposed? Uh none opposed. That passed unanimously to um recommend approval of text amendment 8.2 2 use tables section 8.5 with the modifications to strike B2 as proposed and to add at the end of C1 or previously approved variances thereon to approve section 6 three table 6.3.1B over you overlay use table, but to recommend to not strike 9.1.2B festival parking as it relates to festivals or events. Okay. Um, we have no items to consider for changes to the comprehensive plan. We do have another CPAC meeting coming up on Tracy May 3rd, 4th. the Thursday.

That Thursday. Yeah, the first Thursday in May. Um, you should have gotten an email from Shoua on that. Um, we have uh no old business to consider other than I do have I have a question, Robin. We had heard and made a recommendation to city council regarding um some of the changes that uh were presented at the last city council meeting. When do you and they did recommend some of that come back to us. When do you think we'll get that back?

That's exactly right. So, I actually have a summary here that I can share with all of you. Um, and this is the

talking about the summary that the council had on the night of April 13th. Colorcoded. I like it. Thank you, Okay. So, um this summary includes 15 text amendments of which four were deferred. So, uh the four that were deferred you can see identified uh with the yellow dot and those items would be coming back before the planning commission.

Yep. And just to recap, that's the incentive for adjacent to public street may request plus 5% a use area incentive with BCA approval. Um the rear to rear and rear to side adjacency natural areas, the side torear adjacencies and agric agricultural track exemp exception um with limited subdivision while preserving large track working alongside Kuvo. So those four will be coming back at a high level summary. That's correct.

Okay. And what is your sense of are are you planning to kind of give us a we had that was a lot to absorb. Are you thinking we'll have a briefing session and then another meeting to more get into the texts and things? So So we are considering uh CZIM in May. We um we are not able to meet the advertising deadlines for a May meeting. So we are anticipating a June planning commission meeting. uh presentation of the four items that would be coming back to you. Yeah. So, presentation and vote at that meeting. Yes. Okay. What about public?

So, the CZIM, we're hoping to have the CZIM for May would be for the public. That's correct. And then they can come again when we hear it in June.

In June. That is correct. I would encourage you all because um Tracy and Sarah did a really good job presenting it to city council and you know kind of try to focus on the things they had highlighted in yellow because that's what's coming back. Um the rest of the stuff got approved so that's important to understand. Yeah, they approved that and we'll be seeing that in our updated UDC. But the yellow is the stuff and of course it's the more complicated stuff. But it it it you know in those five areas. So kind of take a deep dive and listen on those areas I think would be helpful in preparing for June.

That's correct. I watched it. Your exhibits were really good. Oh, thank you. Thank you. Yes. Are those available like posted someplace other than watching the video? We don't have them posted at least the presentation posted right now. We do not um certainly the the video of that meeting you can go and watch. Okay. And uh um and we do expect to have those graphics at the CZIM meeting um so that those can be in review. They were really helpful.

Yeah. and maybe to us a little sooner than the Friday before because it's a lot. If we could Yeah. As if you can get those posted as soon as possible that it would be great. I guess though when you post them for the CBCIM or do you not post the CCIM? But we usually have like some basic information. So if we're ready I mean Yeah. Yeah. We'll we'll have the the I mean, normally we have a verbiage and then Tracy and Sarah want to

I just want us to be Yeah. I just wanted us to be as prepared as possible. So if there is anything that's out there, if you just send us an email to say, "Hey, it's it's out there if you so you can take a look." I was looking at the schedule in May. So that fourth Tuesday runs right after Memorial Day. So I'm wondering if maybe if we pull it a week before possibly. So we'll we'll look at that. But that what normally would be a CZIM falls and I don't know if I scheduled it the week before or not. So that fourth Tuesday is the day. Okay. Are you talking Wednesday in May?

I'm sorry. Wednesday for us or you talking the CZIM meeting? I'm talking about the CZ. I was just trying to proactively think when people would be in town and they want to attend and a lot of people go out of town for Memorial Week, but we can look at that internally. So, you're thinking about the week of the 18th through the 22nd, right? So, we usually have it on a Tuesday and I don't know if there's any other meetings going on. If there's a BCA meeting or the 19th, we'll try to figure it out. That would be the 19th. I just watched for graduation schedules that week. Oh, I'm not sure if we can avoid all that, too. But school dumps out on the 21st. Like toss May in the air.

Yeah. Yeah. So, we would So, if we needed to meet in May, we'd still be on the 27th, right? That I double checked our schedule. Um, and it was on That's right. The planning commission is on May 27th, but you're talking about rather than have the CCIM on the 26th, maybe see if you could move that up if you can meet notice. Yeah, that's correct. But the first week we can actually meet the publication notice is the week of the 18th. So, it has to be basically that week or later. Is that right? Just from an advertising,

not it doesn't have the 30 days for the CCI. We're kind of doing that as a courtesy that council sent it back technically to you all. Okay. But maybe it doesn't even have to be exactly that week. Maybe it could be in the beginning of June before the planning commission. So we can talk about it internally. Are the CZIMs set up so they can be attended remotely digitally online? No.

Do we have the ability to do that? I guess we have the ability to. We used to do it during COVID, but um for the last few years we haven't. I'm just wondering in terms of we've struggled to get turnout at some of these things we've had lately. I'm just thinking of ways that we can make it more convenient for more people to attend. I don't know if that's something we need to Well, especially if it's May 27th. Yeah. I think part of it too is the to have it if I remember too to some extent it's like

during co it was broadcast but you couldn't necessarily participate you could watch but not input it was harder to input because I think you well no it was all zoom it was zoom so rather than broadcast if I remember a couple that I attended okay yeah I I personally don't feel comfortable with that timeline because of the 27th. Well, it overlaps school. It overlaps Memorial Week. Yep. Yeah. Is it going to get the public that we need to look at this, but you could do it s like because there's no um there's not a 30-day notice on CZIM. You could even do it

the second week, the 13th of May. Well, I think it's a matter of staff if you could be ready and and we could all and we could always consider, you know, having more of a June public presence and then coming back to plan commission in July. Yeah. Well, you could is I mean, there was one time they heard it on Tuesday, we heard it on Wednesday. You could even do it the first week of June and that would still be weeks before we heard it. I don't think there's any way to avoid everybody having because of just the time of the year, right? So, and then the next month you hit summer vacation weeks and others.

I almost like the idea that you did it June 2nd rather than May 27th or the 19th when everybody's maybe at graduation for this that or the other. So, and that still gives several several weeks before we would hear it in June. They did lift the moratorum so we don't have that, right? That's correct. How do you guys feel about June recommend uh CCIM on June 2nd as opposed to the May dates? Fred's nodding. Yes, I'm fine with that, but I'm not here that week. Yeah. Well, we usually Yeah, I'm fine. We We may run into I mean half half the people in town skip town right after the week after school lets out.

Yeah, but that would be more the week before too. Memorial Day weekend. There's never a perfect date. Never a perfect date. They can always email. Right, Tracy? That's right. That's true. That's right. Yes. Yeah. And we could just read those questions or or come or come see us in June. Sit. How do you feel about that? I know you've got school kids, so maybe more. No, June is probably a little bit better than that. Yeah. Okay. Last week of May.

For what it's worth, that's that Tuesday. We may have to look at the schedule. We have a typically we have DRB on the first Tuesday of the month. Um and so we wouldn't be able to record in here. Sometimes when we've had conflict, we'll have a meeting over in community place. So we just need to see if there's you know it doesn't have to be a Tuesday. Maybe it's that Wednesday the 3. It doesn't look like there's any meetings that night. So, um, and maybe Wednesday would be better because if people are taking on a week plus, right, they'd be back by Wednesday. Okay, we'll look at that internally and confirm a date.

Yeah, but I would we want to get as them the ability to participate in person if possible because it is kind of complicated. Okay. Anything else under old business? Any new bit? We have no items under new business. Can I entertain a motion to adjurnn? I'll second. No, I didn't make the motion. I was entertaining it. Make a motion to adjurnn. Um, okay. Second and third.

So, we have a motion to adjourn from Commissioner Shaw with a second from Commissioner Edwards. The time of adjournment is 6:41 p.m. Thank you all. You need a vote. Oh, all in favor? I I Thank you, Paul. Well, uh, we are